View Full Version : My Report (in several parts)

23-12-2005, 23:47:16

\usepackage{geometry} % See geometry.pdf to learn the layout options. There are lots.
\geometry{letterpaper} % ... or a4paper or a5paper or ...
%\geometry{landscape} % Activate for for rotated page geometry
\usepackage[parfill]{parskip} % Activate to begin paragraphs with an empty line rather than an indent

\DeclareGraphicsRule{.tif}{png}{.png}{`convert #1 `dirname #1`/`basename #1 .tif`.png}


%\textwidth = 6.5 in
%\textheight = 9 in
%\oddsidemargin = 0.0 in
%\evensidemargin = 0.0 in
%\topmargin = 0.0 in
%\headheight = 0.0 in
%\headsep = 0.0 in
%\parskip = 0.2in
%\parindent = 0.0in


\def\blp{\bigg (}
\def\brp{\bigg )}


\title{Calibration Program for the BigBite Calorimeter for the E02013 experiment at Jefferson Labs}
\author{Jon Miller}
\date{Fall 2005}



The BigBite detector is a calorimeter made up of a shower, a preshower, and a wire chamber. The shower and preshower are made up of lead glass bars, which are then connected to photo multiplier tubes (PMTs). These PMTs, and the ADCs (Analog to Digital Converters) they are connected to, are what are to be calibrated by this program. The goal is to determine the the pedestal, or current supplied by the PMT when no events occur as observed by the ADC and then to determine the peak that results from cosmics (which would mostly be muons). Ones the peaks are determined, the pedestals can be set in the ADCs, so the 0 channel is the same for all detectors, and the high voltage can be roughly set so that the channel positions of the cosmics (which are the gains) are roughly equivalent. Following this, and once the detector is put into position in hall A, electrons resulting from the beams interaction with the target will be incident on the detector. Using coincidence with the neutron arm, and precise angle calculations determined by the positions of the detectors, the energy of the incident electrons can be determined. Using this, and summing the clusters that the electron passes through the gain of the different detectors can be determined.
E_{nergy} = \sum G_{p,i} P_{i} + \sum G_{s,i} S_{i}
Here E is the energy of the electron, \[G_{p,i}\] is the gain of the ith preshower detector, \[G_{s,i}\] is the gain of the ith shower detector, \[S_{i}\] is the channel value of the ith detector, \[P_{i}\] is the channel value of the ith preshower detector, and the sum runs over the cluster. These gain values can then be stored, or if any drift too far from the others the high voltage can be changed to bring them in line.


The first project that was undertaken was a program that was intended for
use in pedestal calibration. This was intended to later be expanded for
cosmic calibration. Both of these programs were written to use old HRS
data from previous experiments. They were then to be adjusted for BigBite
(And the neutron arm) data. The second project that was undertaken was to
create a program to do calibration from electrons. This was also to be
written for a previous experiment, the spin duality experiment E01-012, then ported for use in this experiment.

\section{First Project}
\label{sec:First Project}

First Project The program for the first project in it's final iteration is
known as Adc\_Cal\_BB11.C. This is to be run in then analyzer, after a root
file is loaded. The process to create a root file is straightforward for
the simple dataset. First data, and a corresponding database are selected
(also an output.def file, but the default was fine for that in
general). Databases in the directory the replay script is ran in are used
preferentially. The replay script was provided by Bodo Reitz, and was
highly simplified. After replay, a root file would be created. This file is
a tree, with a number of different variables, most of them useless at
this time. It is important to check the root file for what variables are
wished to be used. This can be done in analyzer by using the command
TBrowser b.

Adc\_Cal\_BB11.C has two main modes of operation. One is for viewing
variables, the other is for printing peak information/database files.
Initially the user is suppose to enter in the variable name that the user
wishes to study. If it is a common one (for the HRS data), titles are then known, otherwise it is left as user defined.

23-12-2005, 23:47:41
actually, I am going to link it


23-12-2005, 23:48:19
(this is a report of a program that took me way too long to write, but I didn't know anything when I started, it is also the only program I finished)


23-12-2005, 23:49:08
ok, that is a better way to do it

(rename file to tex)


24-12-2005, 02:24:28
I can't seem to be able to download it - I get a file of size 0. Perhaps zipping it would help (that way you could also include the figures).

From what I see so far:
1. Doesn't your reviewer require an abstract?

2. A small hint - it is slightly faster to write
\[ \] (for new line)
$ $ (when in the same line)
\begin{equation} \end{equation}

Also, you might want to consider posting a PDF version for people who want to help, but have no knowledge of LaTeX.

KH of the North
24-12-2005, 04:44:58
Why not just pdf it and link it?

KH of the North
24-12-2005, 04:45:19
Oh, that's what LoD said.

24-12-2005, 07:49:52
The maths makes my head hurt. :(

24-12-2005, 10:04:42
Currently it won't compile.

Jon Miller

24-12-2005, 10:07:17
Another all time low

24-12-2005, 10:17:43
if you aren't looking for lows, why open my threads?


24-12-2005, 10:18:50
Mouse training

24-12-2005, 10:25:39
Sorry about that, I sort of went to sleep and didn't realise that the link didn't work.

Thanks to whoever looked at it.

Jon Miller

24-12-2005, 10:53:54
I don't understand it, I like it that way.

24-12-2005, 11:22:35
-Start the introduction on a seperate page, looks nicer that way.
-having a line consisting of one symbol is not very clean. As mentione before, use $ $ for mathemathical formulas in this case.
-The code should be in an appendix (just add \appendix before the relevant section).

24-12-2005, 11:35:42
yeah, I haven't been able to compile it for some time (Because of the figures, I think?), so I didn't know what the equations looked like


24-12-2005, 12:16:23
I'd agree with LoD about putting the introduction on a seperate page and making the code appendix A. I'd also revise the introduction so that it is slightly more clear and flowing. I realize that technical writting is supposed to very short and to the point but there simply must be a clearer way to say what you want.

24-12-2005, 12:55:01
oh, I am bad at writing

it is one of my failings


24-12-2005, 13:59:14
Seems like you have a communication problem rather than a knowledge problem

24-12-2005, 17:43:27
problem was one of my eps files wasn't properly ecapsulated


01-01-2006, 10:05:32
Did you do all the degassing steps?

Sir Penguin
01-01-2006, 22:06:18
Do you have an outline?